Abstract
In this paper, we consider the semilinear Dirichlet problem , in , on ∂, where is a bounded regular domain in , , is a small positive parameter, and V is a non-constant positive -function on . We construct interior peak solutions with isolated bubbles. This leads to a multiplicity result for . The proof of our results relies on precise expansions of the gradient of the Euler–Lagrange functional associated with , along with a suitable projection of the bubbles. This projection and its associated estimates are new and play a crucial role in tackling such types of problems.
Keywords:
partial differential equations; variational analysis; nonlinear analysis; critical Sobolev exponent MSC:
35A15; 35J20; 35J25
1. Introduction and Main Results
Let us consider the following semilinear Dirichlet problem
where is a bounded regular domain in , , and V is a smooth positive function on .
The problem in the form of appears in various physical models, including quantum transport and non-relativistic Newtonian gravity, as discussed in [,,] and the references cited therein. It is also related to the Yamabe problem in differential geometry; see, for example, [] and the references therein.
In the subcritical case, that is, , proving the existence of a solution to is relatively straightforward. This can be demonstrated by noting that the following infimum
is attained due to the compactness of the embedding of .
In the critical case, where , it is well known that the existence of solutions to depends on the geometry of the domain , the properties of V, and the dimension n. For example, if V is constant and is starshaped, the problem has no solutions. Given the extensive literature on this topic, we will only highlight the pioneering papers by Brezis–Nirenberg [] and Bahri–Coron [].
The supercritical case, , is significantly more challenging to address, as there is no embedding of . Notable existence and nonexistence results in specific domains are due to Passaseo [,]. We also refer to the paper [], which addresses domains with small circular holes. For the case of the ball, we refer to the results in [,,,]. It is important to note that the general domain case does not appear to be fully understood.
Note that, for , the problem is a variational problem and its Euler–Lagrange function is defined on by
When q is critical, the functional does not satisfy the Palais–Smale condition; that is, there exist sequences along which is bounded, with a gradient that goes to zero, and which do not converge. This is violated for all levels , where
These compactness defects correspond to a concentration in N points (possibly confused) of sequences in ; that is,
where denotes the Dirac mass at (see [,]).
In this paper, we are interested in slightly subcritical problems that actually admit solutions concentrating, as goes to zero, at certain interior points of the domain . More precisely, we consider the problem
where is a bounded regular domain of , , is the critical Sobolev exponent for the embedding , V is a positive function on , and is a small positive parameter.
Our aim is to establish the existence and multiplicity of interior peak solutions of for any positive functions V and for any smooth bounded domain provided that is positive and sufficiently small.
To state our result, we need to fix some notation. We denote by the Euler–Lagrange functional associated with defined on by
In this paper, we will use the following scalar product and its corresponding norm
Notice that this norm is equivalent to the two classical norms of and .
Let and ; we define
These functions, for and , are the only positive solutions [] of
The aim of our first result is to construct interior peak solutions. More precisely, we prove the following theorem.
Theorem 1.
Let and be a positive -function with m non- degenerate critical points . Then, for any , there exists small such that for any , problem admits a solution satisfying that develops exactly one peak at each point and converges weakly to zero in as . More precisely, there exist ,..., with the same order as for and as for and N points for all j such that
Theorem 1 allows us to obtain the following multiplicity result in connection with the number of critical points of V.
Theorem 2.
Let and let be a positive -function with m non-degenerate critical points. Then, for positive and sufficiently small ε, the number of solutions of is at least equal to .
The structure of the proof follows a similar approach to that in [,,]. It is based on fine expansions of the gradient of the functional . However, we adopt a different framework—that is, an appropriate projection—to handle our case. This projection, along with its estimates, proves instrumental in addressing such types of problems. In the next section, we introduce a two-parameter family of approximate solutions to the problem and seek a true solution in a neighborhood of this set. We also introduce the neighborhood at infinity, provide precise estimates for the infinite-dimensional part, and perform the expansion of the gradient of the associated functional. Section 3 is devoted to the proof of our results. Section 4 discusses potential directions for future research. The proofs involve certain technical estimates, which are provided in the Appendix A for the reader’s convenience.
2. Analytical Frameworks
Let and ; we notice that the function does not belong to ; thus, we need to introduce its projection onto this space. Different projections have been introduced into the literature. In our case, we will use the following projection
In the sequel, for and , we denote
To enhance readability, the estimates of and are deferred to the Appendix A, allowing the main argument to be presented more clearly.
Next, we introduce the neighborhood at infinity, provide precise estimates for the infinite-dimensional part, and finally, perform the expansion of the gradient of the associated functional.
To this aim, first, let , be N points in satisfying for some constant , and let be large so that, for each ,
is small enough, and we denote
where is the jth component of .
Second, let be a small real and be a fixed small constant; we introduce the following set:
where M is a fixed large constant, and for .
Notice that, for , since we have and , we deduce that
For each and , we associate a function
We notice that the orthogonality is taken with respect to the scalar product defined in (1).
Furthermore, for each , the following estimates hold
Below, our aim is to find some positive critical points u of with the form (8). We start by studying the v-part of u.
2.1. Minimizing with Respect to the Infinite-Dimensional Part
Using Lemma A1 and the fact that , we obtain
where
Proposition 1.
Let , be N positive reals close to 1, let be N points in Ω satisfying for some constant , and let be large reals. Assume that the ’s, for , and the ’s, for , are small enough. Then, there exists a positive constant such that
Proof.
Using Lemma A1 and the fact that for each i, we derive that
Observe that, since is bounded, for each and satisfying that is small, it follows that
Now, using (12) and Proposition A1, we deduce that
Therefore, the quadratic form becomes
Observe that is studied in several works, and it is proved that it is coercive on the space (see Proposition 3.1 of [])
where, for and , the function is defined by the following PDE:
Note that the coercivity of implies the existence of such that
Now, for and , observe that
and for ,
We deduce that Finally, since the norm and the norm of are equivalent, the proof of the proposition follows from (13) and (14). □
Now, we will estimate the linear form on v defined in (11). More precisely, we have
Lemma 1.
Let . Then, for each , we have
Proof.
Using (9) and Lemma A1, we obtain
by using the embedding Theorem of for each .
Note that Proposition 1 implies that is a positive definite quadratic form on . Hence, combining (10), Proposition 1, and Lemma 1, we deduce that
Proposition 2.
Let and let . Then, for ε small, there exists a unique satisfying
Moreover, satisfies .
Next, we perform the expansion of the gradient of the functional .
2.2. Expansion of the Gradient
We begin with the expansion in terms of the gluing parameter . Specifically, we prove
Proposition 3.
Let , and . Then, for ε small and , we have
Proof.
Observe that, since , it holds that
First, for , we have
and we have
Second, for , as in the previous computation, we have
Estimate of the first integral is well known, and we have
For the second integral, using Proposition A1, easy computations imply that
Now, we focus on the last term in (21). Let , using Lemma A1, we obtain
The first integral in the right hand side of (27) can be written as (using Lemma A1, Proposition A1, (12), (23) and (26))
where we have used (64) of []. Concerning the second integral in (27), it is computed in Lemma A6.
Combining the previous estimates, the proof follows. □
Next, we present a balancing formula that relates to the rate of concentration. Specifically, we prove
Proposition 4.
Let , , and . For small ε and , we have
where is defined in Lemma A3 and
Proof.
We will follow the proof of Proposition 3, and we need to be more precise in some integrals. Since , we have
First, for , using Remark A1 and (23), we have
Second, for , using Lemma A3, we obtain
We derive that
Now, using Lemma A1, we obtain
The last integral is computed in Lemma A6. For the first one, using Lemma A1 and Remark A1, we obtain
First, we remark that the remainder term is computed in (23). Second, we focus on estimating the first integral. Using (12) and Lemma A1, we obtain
To estimate the last term in (33), using Propositions A1 and A2, we obtain
Concerning the other integrals of (33), using (12) and Propositions A1 and A2, we obtain
Thus, using Lemma A3, we obtain
It remains to study the first integral of (33). Using (91) of [], we obtain
Combining the previous estimates, (33) becomes
This completes the estimate of the first integral of (32).
We end this section by presenting a balancing condition related to the points of concentration.
Proposition 5.
Let , , and . For small ε and , we have
where is defined in Lemma A4 and
Proof.
We will follow the proof of Proposition 4. Since , we have
First, for , using Remark A1 and (7), we obtain
Second, for , using Lemma A4, we obtain
We derive that
Now, using Lemma A1, we obtain
The last integral is computed in Lemma A6. For the first one, using Lemma A1, we obtain
To estimate the last integral in (38), using (12) and (7), we obtain
For the first integral in (38) with , following the same computations as in (35), we obtain
Concerning the first integral in (38) with , using Lemma A1 and (12), we obtain
For the last two terms in (41), using Propositions A1 and A3, we obtain
Concerning the other integrals of (41), using (12) and Propositions A1 and A3, by oddness, we obtain
Using Lemma A4, we obtain
Combining the previous estimates, (41) becomes
It remains to study the second integral in the right-hand side of (38). Using Propositions A1 and A3, we obtain
Observe that, using Proposition A1, we have
and, expanding around , by oddness, we obtain
We derive that
Finally, combining (36)–(43) and Lemma A6, the result follows. □
3. Construction of Interior Peak Solutions
Let be non-degenerate distinct critical points of V. As in [] (see also [,]), the strategy of the proof of Theorem 1 is as follows. Let
where M is a positive constant and is defined by (5).
Note that, for each , it follows that by taking and to satisfy and .
In addition, we consider the following function
We observe that is a critical point of if and only if is a critical point of . Therefore, our goal is to find the critical points of . Since the variable v belongs to , the Lagrange multiplier theorem enables us to derive the following proposition.
Proposition 6.
is a critical point of if and only if there exists such that the following holds:
To prove Theorem 1, we will conduct a detailed analysis of the preceding equations. Observe that
Let , which is defined by (44). Clearly, , as obtained in Proposition 2, satisfies Equation (48). Hence, we need to solve the system defined by Equations (45)–(47). By combining Equations (45)–(52), we observe that is a critical point of if and only if solves the following system: for each
To analyze the system , , , we need to estimate the constants s, s and s that appear in the equations and . This is the aim of the following lemma
Lemma 2.
Let . Then, for ε small, the following statements hold:
Proof.
Taking the scalar product of (see (48)) with the functions , and , respectively, we obtain the following quasi-diagonal system:
where c, and are some positive universal constants.
Combining Propositions 3, 4 and 5 and the fact that , we see that, for all , we have
Thus Lemma 2 follows. □
Next, we will analyze the equations , and . To simplify the system for solving, we introduce the following change of variables
where and are defined in Proposition 4.
This change of variables enables us to express the system in the following simplified form:
Lemma 3.
For ε small, equations , and are equivalent to the following system:
where and are defined in Propositions 4 and 5.
Proof.
Using Proposition 3, it follows that
Now, observe that
Thus, is equivalent to
For the second equation , Proposition 4 and Lemma 2 imply that
where is defined in Proposition 4. Writing
we obtain the second equation in the system .
Lastly, writing
and using Proposition 5 and Lemma 2, we see that Equation is equivalent to the third equation in the system which completes the proof of Lemma 3. □
We are now prepared to prove our results regarding the existence of interior peak solutions. Since Theorem 2 follows directly from Theorem 1, it suffices to prove the latter.
Proof of Theorem 1.
The system , as presented in Lemma 3, can be expressed in the following form:
where , and .
Thus, using Brouwer’s fixed point theorem, we derive that the system has at least one solution for small . To complete the proof of the theorem, it remains to prove that the constructed function is positive. To this aim, we first remark, since , that for small . By construction, satisfies
Multiplying by and integrating on , we obtain
But we have
which implies that
Since and as , we derive that and . Thus, using the maximum principle, has to be positive. This completes the proof of the theorem. □
4. Conclusions
In this paper, we have explored the existence of solutions to a nonlinear elliptic problem with Dirichlet boundary conditions, featuring a slightly subcritical exponent for Sobolev embedding . By performing a detailed asymptotic analysis of the gradient of the corresponding Euler–Lagrange functional near the so-called “bubbles”, we were able to construct solutions that concentrate at isolated interior points. These techniques enabled us to establish a multiplicity result for the problem. The approach employed is specific to variational problems. While this paper addresses the existence of solutions and multiplicity results for the given problem, several natural directions for future research and open questions remain:
- (i)
- Impact of the Nature of Critical Points of the Potential: The solutions we have constructed in this paper rely on the assumption that the critical points of the potential V are non-degenerate. What happens if this hypothesis is not satisfied, particularly when V satisfies some flatness condition?
- (ii)
- Location of the Concentration Points: This paper focuses on constructing solutions that concentrate at isolated interior points. An interesting extension would be to study the existence of solutions that concentrate at non-isolated points, boundary points, or interior points that converge to the boundary.
- (iii)
- Asymptotic Behavior of Solutions: Another important question is to fully characterize the asymptotic behavior of the solutions, providing a comprehensive understanding of their long-term behavior.
- (iv)
- Impact of Subcritical Exponent: The current work focuses on a slightly subcritical exponent for Sobolev embedding. Future research could explore the problem with exponents that are slightly supercritical, i.e., when but close to zero.
Author Contributions
H.A. (Hissah Alharbi), H.A. (Hibah Alkhuzayyim), M.B.A. and K.E.M.: conceptualization, methodology, investigation, writing original draft preparation, writing—review and editing. All authors contributed equally to the writing of this paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Appendix A
In this appendix, we gather several estimates required throughout the paper. We begin with the following auxiliary analytical formulas, whose proofs follow from a Taylor expansion with the Lagrange remainder.
Lemma A1.
Let and . It holds that
Let and . It holds that
Let and be such that and . Then, it holds that
Let , , z be such that for some positive constant β and . It holds that
Let and , then it holds that
Let , for , and let s be such that for some index i. Then, it holds that
Next, we provide crucial estimates of the function and defined by (2) and (3), respectively. In particular, we show that the projection is close to the initial function . We start by the following proposition, which is very useful throughout the paper.
Proposition A1.
Let , be such that , and let λ be a positive large real. Then, the following statements hold
- (i)
- (ii)
- where
Proof.
We start by proving Assertion . We have
Using (A1) and Corollary of [], we derive that
which implies the first and the last inequalities of .
In the same way, using (2) and Corollary of [], we derive that
The proof of Assertion is thereby completed.
Now, we focus on proving Assertion . Using (A1), we have
where G denotes the Green’s function for the Laplace operator with Dirichlet boundary conditions.
For the first part in the right-hand side of (A2), using and Lemma A2, we have
For the second part, we have for each and for each . Hence, we obtain
Furthermore, since , we have
thus, we derive that
Now, observe that
Combining (A2)–(A5), the proof of Assertion follows. □
The next result deals with the estimates of the derivatives of and with respect to .
Proposition A2.
Let , be such that , and let λ be a large positive real. Then, the following statements hold:
- (i)
- (ii)
- (iii)
where is defined in Proposition A1.
Proof.
We start by proving Assertion . From (2), we deduce that
Now, let
It follows that, and are in and
Applying Corollary 3.2 of [], we derive that
which completes the proof of .
Concerning Assertion , from (A1), it follows that
Let
It follows that
Applying Corollary of [], we deduce that
In the same way, we derive that
Thus,
(A8) and (A9) give the proof of .
Concerning Assertion , it follows from and of Proposition A1.
This completes the proof of the proposition. □
Next, we deal with the estimates of the derivatives of and with respect to a.
Proposition A3.
Let , be such that , and let λ be a large positive real. Then, for , we have
- (i)
- (ii)
- (iii)
Proof.
The proof is identical to that of Proposition A2 utilizing the following equations:
and
□
Now, we give the following important remark.
Remark A1.
As a consequence of Propositions A1, A2 and A3, we remark that
Next, we give some useful integral estimates involving the functions and their projections.
Lemma A2
([]). Let be such that . For each , it holds that
- (a)
- (b)
Lemma A3.
Let , be large, and let be such that . It holds that
where if and
Proof.
Observe that, for each and , by using the change of variables , it is easy to see that
We deduce that
and therefore,
which gives the proof of the first assertion.
Concerning the second one, using (2), we obtain
Thus, (A7) and Propositions A1 and A2 imply that
Observe that, using Proposition A1, we obtain
and therefore, easy computations imply that
For the last term in (A12), using Green’s representation formula and (2), we have
and therefore, for such that is small, it follows that for each and
Thus, we obtain
Finally, expanding V around a and using (52), (53) of [], we obtain
The proof of the second assertion is completed.
Now let us prove the third claim. Using (A6) and the first claim of this lemma, we obtain
The proof of the lemma is thereby completed. □
Lemma A4.
Let , be large and let be such that . It holds that
where appears only when , if and
Proof.
Let and . Notice that
For the first assertion, by oddness, it follows that
Concerning the second assertion, arguing as in the proof of (A12), using (A7) and (A11), and Propositions A1 and A3, we obtain
The last term in (A16) is computed in (A15). In addition, observe that , and therefore, using Proposition A1, we obtain
and therefore, easy computations imply that
Finally, in , expanding V around a, by oddness, we obtain
The proof of the second assertion is completed.
Now let us prove the third assertion. Using (A10) and the first assertion, we obtain
This completes the proof of the lemma. □
Lemma A5.
Let , be such that . For each , it holds that
Proof.
Let . Using Proposition A1, it holds that
Observe that
In addition, by the definition of , for , it holds that
The proof of the result is completed for . In the same way, the proof follows for . □
Lemma A6.
Let . For and , let
Let and ; it holds that
Proof.
Observe that, from Propositions A2 and A3, we deduce that . Hence, using Claim (4) of Lemma A1, it follows that
Note that, for (which implies that ), for each k and ℓ, it holds that
However, for , using (39), we derive that
For the other integral, applying Claim (3) of Lemma A1 and (12), we obtain
The last integral is computed in Lemma A5. However, the second one can be deduced by Holder’s inequality, and we obtain . It remains to estimate the first one. We distinguish three cases depending on the value of .
- If , using Lemma A5 and the fact that , we obtain
- If , using Proposition A2, Lemma A5, and the fact that , we obtain
- If , as the previous cases, we obtain
Hence, we obtain
The proof of the Lemma is completed. □
References
- Bahrami, M.; Grobardt, A.; Donadi, S.; Bassi, A. The Schrodinger-Newton equation and its foundations. New J. Phys. 2014, 16, 115007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bokanowski, O.; López, J.L.; Soler, J. On an exchange interaction model for quantum transport: The Schrodinger-Poisson-Slater system. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 2003, 13, 1397–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Penrose, R. On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction. Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 1996, 28, 581–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Druet, O.; Hebey, E. Elliptic equations of Yamabe type. IMRS Int. Math. Res. Surv. 2005, 1, 1–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brezis, H.; Nirenberg, L. Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1983, 36, 437–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahri, A.; Coron, J.M. On a nonlinear elliptic equation involving the critical Sobolev exponent: The effect of the topology of the domain. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1988, 41, 253–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Passaseo, D. Existence and multiplicity of positive solutions for elliptic equations with supercritical nonlinearity in contractible domains. Rend. Accad. Naz. Sci. XL Mem. Mat. 1992, 16, 77–98. [Google Scholar]
- Passaseo, D. Nonexistence results for elliptic problems with supercritical nonlinearity in nontrivial domains. J. Funct. Anal. 1993, 114, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pino, M.D.; Wei, J. Supercritical elliptic problems in domains with small holes. Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Liné Aire 2007, 24, 507–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossi, M. Radial solutions for the Brezis–Nirenberg problem involving large nonlinearities. J. Funct. Anal. 2008, 250, 2995–3036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossi, M.; Noris, B. Positive constrained minimizers for supercritical problems in the ball. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2012, 140, 2141–2154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merle, F.; Peletier, L.A. Positive solutions of elliptic equations involving supercritical growth. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A 1991, 118, 49–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merle, F.; Peletier, L.A.; Serrin, J. A bifurcation problem at a singular limit. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 1994, 43, 585–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lions, P.L. The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The limit case. Part I. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 1985, 1, 145–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Struwe, M. A global compactness result for elliptic boundary value problems involving limiting nonlinearities. Math. Z. 1984, 187, 511–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caffarelli, L.; Gidas, B.; Spruck, J. Asymptotic symmetry and local behavior of semilinear elliptic equations with critical Sobolev growth. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1989, 42, 271–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahri, A.; Li, Y.; Rey, O. On a variational problem with lack of compactness: The topological effect of the critical points at infinity. Calc. Var. Partial. Diff. Equ. 1995, 3, 67–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ben Ayed, M.; El Mehdi, K.; Mohamed Salem, F. Inerior multi-peak solution for a slightly subcritical nonlinear Neumann equation. Symmetry 2024, 16, 291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El Mehdi, K.; Mohamed Salem, F. Interior Bubbling Solutions for an Elliptic Equation with Slightly Subcritical Nonlinearity. Mathematics 2023, 11, 1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahri, A. Critical Points at Infinity in Some Variational Problems; Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series 182; Longman Scientific and Technical: Harlow, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Gilbarg, D.; Trudinger, N.S. Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2nd ed.; Classics in Mathematics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ben Ayed, M.; El Mehdi, K. Interior blowing up solutions for a subcritical Neumann problem in small dimensional domains. submitted 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Ben Ayed, M.; El Mehdi, K. Non-Existence of Interior Bubbling solutions for Slightly Supercritical Elliptic Problems. Bound. Value Probl. 2023, 90, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).